Opioid Utilization in Outpatient Anorectal Surgery: An Opportunity for Improvement.

INTRODUCTION: The opioid epidemic has resulted in close examination of postsurgical prescribing patterns. Little is known about postoperative opioid use in outpatient anorectal procedures. This study evaluated patient opioid use and created prescribing recommendations for these procedures. METHODS: One hundred and four patients undergoing outpatient anorectal procedures from January to May 2018 were surveyed on opioid consumption, surgical experience, and pain satisfaction. Patients were grouped into three tiers based on opioid usage. Multivariable models were used to determine factors associated with poor pain control. RESULTS: Patient satisfaction with pain control was 85.6%. Twenty five percent of patients reported leftover medication and 9.6% of patients requested opioid refills. Opioid prescribing recommendations were generated for each tier using 50th percentile with interquartile ranges. On multivariable modeling, the high-tier group was associated with poorer pain control. CONCLUSIONS: We created opioid quantity prescribing guidelines for common outpatient anorectal procedures. A multimodal approach to pain control utilizing nonopioids may reduce healthcare utilization.

Is newer always better?: comparing cost and short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic right hemicolectomy.

BACKGROUND: Enthusiasm is high for expansion of robotic assisted surgery into right hemicolectomy. But data on outcomes and cost is lacking. Our objective was to determine the association between surgical approach and cost for minimally invasive right hemicolectomy. We hypothesized that a robot approach would have increased costs (both economic and opportunity) while achieving similar short-term outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis with a simulation of operating room utilization at a quaternary care, academic institution. We enrolled patients undergoing minimally invasive right hemicolectomy from November 2017 to August 2019. Patients were categorized by the intended approach- laparoscopic or robotic. The primary outcome was the technical variable direct cost. Secondary outcomes included total cost, supply cost, operating room utilization, operative time, conversion, length of stay and 30-day post-operative outcomes. RESULTS: 79 patients were included in the study. A robotic approach was used in 22% of the cohort. The groups differed significantly only in etiology of surgery. Robotic surgery was associated with a 1.5 times increase in the technical variable direct cost (p < 0.001), increased supply cost (2.6 times; p < 0.001) and increased total cost (1.3 times; p < 0.001). Significant differences were observed in median room time (Robotic: 285 min vs. Laparoscopic: 170 min; p < 0.001) and procedure time (Robotic: 203 min vs. Laparoscopic: 118 min; p < 0.001). There were no differences observed in post-operative outcomes including length of stay or readmission. In a simulation of OR utilization, 45 laparoscopic right hemicolectomies could be performed in an OR in a month compared to 31 robotic cases. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic right hemicolectomy was associated with increased costs with no improvement in post-operative outcomes. In a simulation of operating room efficiency, a robotic approach was associated with 14 fewer cases per month. Practitioners and administrators should be aware of the increased cost of a robotic approach.

Benchmarking patient satisfaction scores in a colorectal patient population.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare reimbursement is rapidly moving away from a fee-for-service model toward value-based purchasing. An integral component of this new focus on quality is patient-centered outcomes. One metric used to define patient satisfaction is the Press Ganey Patient Satisfaction Survey. Data are lacking to accurately benchmark these scores based on diagnosis. We sought to identify if different colorectal disease processes affected a patient's perception of their healthcare experience. METHODS: Adult colorectal patients seen between July 2015 and September 2016 in a tertiary hospital colorectal clinic were mailed a Press Ganey survey. Patients were stratified based on diagnosis: neoplasia, IBD, anorectal and benign colorectal disease. Survey scores were compared across the groups with adjustment for confounding variables. RESULTS: 312 patients responded and formed the cohort. The mean age was 61 (range 18-93) and 56% were women. The cohort breakdown was 38% neoplasia, 32% anorectal, 21% benign, and 9% IBD. In a multivariable model, there was a difference in PG scores by diagnosis; patients with neoplasia had higher Overall scores (ß 10.2; Std Error 4.0; p = 0.01), Care Provider scores (ß 8.5; Std Error 4.2; p = 0.04), Nurse Assistant scores (ß 15.0; Std Error 5.7; p = 0.01), and Personal Issues scores (ß 11.8; Std Error 5/0; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Press Ganey scores were found to vary significantly. Patients with a neoplasia diagnosis reported higher overall satisfaction, Care Provider, Nurse Assistant, and Personal Issues scores. Adjustment for disease condition is important when assessing patient satisfaction as an indicator of quality and as a metric for reimbursement. This study adds to increasing evidence about bias in these scores.

Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction.

Large bowel obstruction is a serious and potentially life-threatening surgical emergency which is associated with high morbidity and mortality rate. The most common etiology is colorectal cancer which accounts for over 60% of all large bowel obstructions. Proper assessment, thoughtful decision-making and prompt treatment is necessary to decrease the high morbidity and mortality which is associated with this entity. Knowledge of the key elements regarding the presentation of a patient with a large bowel obstruction will help the surgeon in formulating an appropriate treatment plan for the patient. Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the various treatment options available is necessary when caring for these patients. This chapter will review the presentation of patients with malignant large bowel obstruction, discuss the various diagnostic modalities available, as well as discuss treatment options and the various clinical scenarios in which they are most appropriately utilized.

Comparing pathologic outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic Surgery in rectal cancer resection: a propensity adjusted analysis of 7616 patients.

BACKGROUND: Margin negative resection of rectal cancer with minimally invasive techniques remains technically challenging. Robotic surgery has potential advantages over traditional laparoscopy. We hypothesize that the difference in the rate of negative margin status will be < 6% between laparoscopic and robotic approach. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2010-2014) was queried for adults with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation and curative resection to conduct an observational retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database. Patients were grouped by either robotic (ROB) or laparoscopic (LAP) approach in an intent-to-treat analysis. Primary outcome was negative margin status, defined as a composite of circumferential resection margin and distal margin. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), readmission, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. RESULTS: 7616 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent minimally invasive resection were identified. 2472 (32%) underwent attempted robotic approach. The overall conversion rate was 13% and was increased in the laparoscopic group [LAP: 15% vs. ROB: 8%; OR 0.47; 95% CI (0.39, 0.57)]. Differences in margin negative resection rate were within the prespecified range of practical equivalence (LAP: 93% vs.: ROB 94%; 95% CI (0.69, 1.06); [Formula: see text] = 1). For secondary outcomes, there was no difference in 30-day readmission [LAP: 9% vs.: ROB 8%; 95% CI (0.84, 1.24)] and 90-day mortality [LAP: 1% vs.: ROB 1%; 95% CI (0.38, 1.24)]. While the median LOS was 5 days in both groups, the mean LOS was 0.6 (95% CI: 0.24, 0.89) days shorter in the robotic group. CONCLUSION: This robust analysis supports either robotic or laparoscopic approach for resection of locally advanced rectal cancer from a margin perspective. Both have similar readmission and 5-year overall survival rates. Patients undergoing robotic surgery have a 0.6-day decrease in LOS and decreased conversion rate.

Assessing Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Referral Patterns to a Tertiary Care Center: A Novel Approach Using Geographic Information System Mapping.

BACKGROUND: Patients and their family members with hereditary colorectal cancer require longitudinal follow-up that is best achieved through a dedicated program with a registry. However, referrals for these conditions remain poor. Geographic information systems technology is a novel method to evaluate geographic variation in multiple realms but is being used more in health care. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate referral patterns with geographic information systems technology to better target efforts for improving overall referrals. We hypothesized that marked variation would exist as to the geospatial locations of referrals and that gastroenterologists would be the dominant referral source. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. PATIENTS: The hereditary colorectal cancer registry was queried from June 2007 to August 2016 for demographics, distance to center, genetic mutations, and the specialty of the referring providers. Geospatial data on both patient and referring specialist were collected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We analyzed patient and referral data with geographic information systems technology to look for gaps and patterns. RESULTS: A total of 676 patients were entered into the registry during this period. Fifty-six percent were women, and the median age was 50 years (interquartile range, 42-60 y). The median distance from the center was 60 miles (interquartile range, 22-120 miles), and 31% carried an identified germline mutation. Gastroenterology represented the overall largest source of referrals and, when broken down by syndrome, they represented the top referral specialty for familial adenomatous polyposis. Surgeons were the largest referral source for Lynch syndrome. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by covariates in the database. CONCLUSIONS: Our hereditary colorectal cancer registry serves a large geographic area, with the largest group of referrals coming from gastroenterologists. Performing this analysis with geographic information systems technology mapping allowed us to identify clustering of patients and providers throughout the region as well as gaps. This information will help to target outreach and distribution of educational materials for providers and their patients to increase registry enrollment. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A950.

Surgical management of primary colonic lymphoma: Big data for a rare problem.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Primary colonic lymphoma (PCL) is rare, heterogeneous, and presents a therapeutic challenge for surgeons. Optimal treatment strategies are difficult to standardize, leading to variation in therapy. Our objective was to describe the patient characteristics, short-term outcomes, and five-year survival of patients undergoing nonpalliative surgery for PCL. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis in the National Cancer Database. Included patients underwent surgery for PCL between 2004 to 2014. Patients with metastases and palliative operations were excluded. Univariate predictors of overall survival were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis. RESULTS: We identified 2153 patients. Median patient age was 68. Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma accounted for 57% of tumors. 30- and 90-Day mortality were high (5.6% and 11.1%, respectively). Thirty-nine percent of patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. For patients surviving 90 days, 5-year survival was 71.8%. Chemotherapy improved survival (surgery+chemo, 75.4% vs surgery, 68.6%; P = .01). Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with overall survival after controlling for age, comorbidity, and lymphoma subtype (HR 1.27; 95% CI, 1.07-1.51; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing surgery for PCL have high rates of margin positivity and high short-term mortality. Chemotherapy improves survival, but <50% receive it. These data suggest the opportunity for improvement of care in patients with PCL.

An enhanced recovery program in colorectal surgery is associated with decreased organ level rates of complications: a difference-in-differences analysis.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative care has lacked coordination and standardization. Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have been shown to decrease aggregate complications across surgical specialties. We hypothesize that the sustained implementation of an ERP will be associated with a decrease in a broad range of complications at the organ system level. STUDY DESIGN: Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal procedures between 1/2011 and 10/2016 were included. Patients were stratified based on exposure to a sustained ERP (7/2014-10/2016) after an 18-month wash-in period in a pre-post analysis. The primary outcome was 30-day complication rate by organ category as collected by National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) abstractors. Demographic and other patient level data were collected. Complication rates were compared using multivariable regression employing a differences-in-differences (DiD) approach using the national NSQIP PUF file to account for secular trends. RESULTS: A total of 1182 patients were included in this study, with 47% treated in an ERP. The two groups were similar in age, gender, race, BMI, comorbidity index, and procedure type. In a multivariable DiD analysis, significant reductions were seen in surgical site infection (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.20-0.43), postoperative pulmonary complications (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.24-0.90), transfusion (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.15-0.51), urinary tract infections (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.18-0.66), sepsis (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.20-0.61), and cardiac complications (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.01-0.84). A reduction in return to the operating room and 30-day readmission was also observed. Median length of stay (LOS) decreased from 5.2 to 3.5 days (p < 0.001). No significant changes occurred for acute kidney injury and hematologic complications. CONCLUSION: An ERP was associated with reduced complication rates across a wide range of organ categories and > 1.5-day reduction in LOS in a colorectal surgery population.

Ketorolac Use and Anastomotic Leak in Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Detailed Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent population-level analyses have linked ketorolac use to adverse outcomes. However, its use is also associated with decreased opioids and faster return of bowel function. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the association between ketorolac and anastomotic leak. We hypothesize that receiving at least 1 dose of ketorolac will not be associated with anastomotic leak in elective colorectal surgery. DESIGN: This is a retrospective, observational cohort study of a prospectively collected data base. Anastomotic leak rates and other patient outcomes were adjusted for patient-level factors and then compared via a multivariable logistic regression. A secondary analysis assessed a dose-response association with anastomotic leak. SETTING: This study was conducted at a tertiary care colorectal surgery service. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery with a nondiverted anastomosis were identified from 2012 to 2016. INTERVENTION: Exposure was defined as any administration of ketorolac during the perioperative time period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was anastomotic leak. RESULTS: A total of 877 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 479 (54.6%) were women, and the median age was 55 years. Overall, 566 (64.5%) patients were exposed to ketorolac. In the cohort, 27 (3.1%) patients experienced an anastomotic leak. In an unadjusted analysis, there was no association between ketorolac exposure and anastomotic leak (ketorolac: 3.1% vs no ketorolac: 3.3%; p = 0.84). This persisted in a multivariable model (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.38-2.57; p = 0.98). Neither AKI (OR, 3.24; 95% CI, 0.51-20.6; p = 0.21), return to the operating room (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.40-2.85; p = 0.88), nor readmission (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.59-1.80; p = 0.93) was associated with ketorolac use. In a secondary analysis of patients receiving ketorolac, there was no association between total ketorolac dosing and anastomotic leak (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.99-1.00; p = 0.20). LIMITATIONS: This study was a retrospective review, and there was a low incidence of anastomotic leak. CONCLUSION: Ketorolac exposure was associated with neither anastomotic leak nor other important postoperative outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A784.

Barriers to laparoscopic colon resection for cancer: a national analysis.

BACKGROUND: Level one evidence has shown that minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colon cancer improves short-term outcomes with equivalent long-term oncologic results when compared to open surgery. However, the adoption of MIS for patients with colon cancer has not been universal. The goal of this study is to identify barriers to the use of MIS surgery in colon cancer resection across the United States. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for all cases of colonic adenocarcinoma resection from 2010 to 2012. Patients undergoing an MIS approach were compared with those undergoing open surgery (OS). MIS was defined as either robotic or laparoscopic surgery. Patients with metastatic disease, surgery for palliation, or tumors >8 cm were excluded. Multivariable modeling was used to identify variables associated with the use of open surgery. RESULTS: After applying exclusion criteria, 124,205 cases were identified. An MIS approach was used in only 54,621 (44%) patients. In a multivariable model adjusting for stage and tumor size, a number of important factors were associated with decreased odds of a MIS approach including black race (OR .91; p < .0001), lack of insurance (OR .51; p < .0001), lower education (OR .88; p < .0001), lower income (OR .83; p < .0001), treatment at a community program (OR .86; p < .0001), and treatment at a low-volume center (OR .79; p < .0001). Utilization of MIS increased over the study period (2010: 38.7%, 2011: 44.0%, 2012: 49.1%; p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: MIS approach is utilized in less than half of all colon resections in this national database, which accounts for over 70% of all diagnosed cancers in the US. Significant variability exists among age, race, insurance status, socioeconomic status, region, and facility type. In light of the recognized benefits of the MIS approach, local and national policy should focus on narrowing these disparities and continuing the upward trend of MIS utilization.